Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Widow Faces Eviction In Fla. City For ‘living Off The Grid’

page: 5
41
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   

dominicus
reply to post by Kurius
 

I've been wanting to build a tiny-house, aprox 200 square feet and park it in my sisters yard in the suburbs, living off the grid, but there are so many laws in the way, stacks and stack of foot thick books, that is a beaurucratic (sp?) nightmare


I would say think outside the box to circumvent the ridiculous. Maybe...build your "house" using living, growing trees or elevate the ground and carve out a space and call it a gopher bunker, camouflage it that no one will notice it?

Below is an idea...a tiny house that is classified as a vehicle. If anyone from the city sends you an eviction notice, just move it a few feet away to a new location.

edit on 19-12-2013 by Kurius because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Wow I don't know where your mind finds all these wonderful ideas you seem to think i have. The point I was making was that your neighbors directly affect the market value of a home. I don't care how much you personally value your home. This entire discussion is about market value.
I also know the difference between price value and worth. My family is worth a lot to me. I value them very much. I would take no price for them. Even if I polish them as you have suggested already.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71
 


Market value? Why do you worry about market value?

Unless you plan to abandon your house, that is. Notice I said "house". If you worry over market value, that's all it is - it's not a home. It's daddy's little money-maker, and that's ALL it is.

All these folks "investing" in daddy's little money-makers damn near crashed and burned to the ground our economy not long ago. I have no sympathy whatsoever for anyone who would turn a home into a mere house by considering it an investment.

I thought we were discussing homes, which is what this lady has that someone else wants to take away on a whim. My mistake. I apologize.

You see, I've been homeless. I know the value of a home, and it has nothing to do with market value. I have hauled cardboard boxes out of dumpsters and laid them on the ground behind the dumpster so that I could sleep without the snow soaking through my clothes and freezing me.

I'm doing better now, obviously, but I don't forget those days. You couldn't pry me out of my home with a crowbar and dynamite, much less by using filthy lucre, mere money.

I have no sympathy at all for folks who lose their asses gambling with their houses. Likewise, I could give a crap if the "market value" of their home keeps them awake at night.

I sleep fine. In my own home. I think this woman should be allowed to do the same, without molestation.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Did you ever abandon the cardboard box you were sleeping in for a dryer or better insulated cardboard box? did you consider that abandoning your home? There is a vast difference between selling your home and abandoning your home. Why would someone not want to improve their living conditions. Nicer neighborhoods, better schools more job opportunities. I believe someone in your previous situation would appreciate a home more than most and want to make it as nice as possible. Sometimes that involves moving.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   
This is really interesting, and really crazy, buuuut: I can't find this in ANY legitimate news source. Even the links in the Blaze story are dead, and the Google shows nothing but aggregate, fringe, and strictly conservative publications running this "story."

There is a video story embedded in some of these sites, but I can find no legitimate publication.

If I can't find it SOMEWHERE reliable ('specially on the Great Google), I'm suspect.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Liquesence
 


Would not be the first time a rumor becomes internet truth. Star for you sir..: )



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Hoosierdaddy71
reply to post by Liquesence
 


Would not be the first time a rumor becomes internet truth. Star for you sir..: )


what rumor?

on the blaze page, there was video from a local news station...they reported on it..that's legit, is it not?



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


For some reason you think I want this woman removed from her home. Nothing could be further from the truth. I honestly don't care how she chooses to live her life. As long as her neighbors are not adversely affected she can go on about her business as she wishes. If she opens a crackhouse next-door they will likely complain. As long as she lives under the same rules as the rest of us I have no problem whatsoever with her.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Daedalus
 


My apologies. I misspoke. It's easy to do when you're reading four or five threads at once. Must be the Vicodin, hate being sick.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Hoosierdaddy71
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Did you ever abandon the cardboard box you were sleeping in for a dryer or better insulated cardboard box? did you consider that abandoning your home?


On, not in, and yes, I abandoned it the very next morning. It wasn't a home, it was a mattress. Homes are somewhat more permanent. When one describes themselves as "homeless", it by definition means they have no home.

And sometimes sleep behind dumpsters.




There is a vast difference between selling your home and abandoning your home. Why would someone not want to improve their living conditions. Nicer neighborhoods, better schools more job opportunities. I believe someone in your previous situation would appreciate a home more than most and want to make it as nice as possible. Sometimes that involves moving.



No one in their right mind would abandon a home on a chance of "improving their living conditions".

That's how people end up behind dumpsters.

Yes, someone in that situation DOES appreciate a home. Once they have one, you can't dynamite them out of it. They sure as heck aren't going to sell it to "improve" it.

They improve it instead.

When I got a home, it was already situated in what I considered an ideal situation. I'm not living in it right now, BUT I've not sold it, either, nor will I, ever. It's home. That's why I'm keeping it to return to after my vagrant wanderings are over. Until then, I don't mind renting - because this ain't home. I'm not going to buy a house with a plan to sell it. That would be taking away an opportunity for someone else locally to get their own home, situated where they want it.

A wise man once told me that if he had a house in Paradise and a home in hell, he'd sell his house and go home. I agree, with the exception that I'm not going to buy that house in Paradise to begin with, and thereby prevent someone else from getting it.

They deserve a home, too.



edit on 2013/12/20 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
reply to post by Kurius
 


It appears from the information provided the law has an issue with people being independent. This could be a problem in country which is still considered land of the free?


Who considers it that?
If it's an American then he needs to wake up and smell the coffee.



posted on Dec, 20 2013 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Hoosierdaddy71
reply to post by nenothtu
 


For some reason you think I want this woman removed from her home. Nothing could be further from the truth. I honestly don't care how she chooses to live her life. As long as her neighbors are not adversely affected she can go on about her business as she wishes. If she opens a crackhouse next-door they will likely complain. As long as she lives under the same rules as the rest of us I have no problem whatsoever with her.



I suppose then that the operating rules are what is at fault. The story says they're booting her over a lack of electricity and "running water", by which I take it to mean that she's not on city water (since she obviously has a water source - no one can live without one), and they are miffed that she's not on the system.

Perhaps doing away with the goofy "rule" that one has to be connected to the system would solve the problem entirely? Then everyone could live by the same rules, and not be forced into living the same way.

Remember - it was not a complaint from the neighbors over anything at all that alerted the goons - it was a news story on how she was living "off the grid". If the neighbors have no complaints, why should the city have one?



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Kurius
 

I grew up in the hills - the sticks - the boondocks. It was heaven

We couldn't see our neighbors - though we did have a couple. All of us were living out there connected by only a very narrow dirt road. Our house was on a rather steep hill, and an even narrower and more uneven dirt road ran up the hill and curved further up the mountain directly behind our house

There was a man who bought some property up there and proceeded to build his own home with his own hands. He half camped up there the whole time he was building it. He finished his home and lived up there for years. A good neighbor - nice enough guy - we barely heard from him (which is I think one of the basic requirements of being a good neighbor). We mostly only saw him drive by in his truck - and occasionally his goats would come down the hill for a visit

I like goats :-)

His house was solid and functional - not a thing of architectural beauty - but, whatever. He also had a lot of stuff on his property - he was always fixing things, inventing things - building pens, fences, projects - you know, stuff

Well, over the years our area became very popular and little by little it changed from a rural area to a bedroom community and the houses got bigger and more pricey and more numerous. My family left that mountain after a certain point, but our neighbor was there for life living at the top of that hill. Until, inevitably, people started building way up there too. They carved a bigger road, ran it past his property, started shaving all the pines and building whole developments back there

And then - those folks decided he didn't 'belong'

He wasn't their kind of people and didn't like having to drive past his ramshackle property and all his stuff. He didn't even live near them - they just didn't want to have to even look at him as they drove past

So, they tried to force him off his own land and out of his own house

People suck sometimes, and that's the truth

I heard they failed - but I really don't know that for sure. I don't go back to visit, it's just not the same - so, I really don't know how the story ends

He'd be a pretty old guy by now - I like to imagine that he stayed up there and is maybe up there still



edit on 12/22/2013 by Spiramirabilis because: So that it looks like I at least tried



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   

AthlonSavage
which is still considered land of the free?

You lost the right to call yourselfs that decades ago.

When you have goverment sponserd rape squads that will bill you $5000 for the plesure of being
abused and a dedicated toture camp in cuba, you have ZERO right to to call yourself free.



posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   

nenothtu

Remember - it was not a complaint from the neighbors over anything at all that alerted the goons - it was a news story on how she was living "off the grid". If the neighbors have no complaints, why should the city have one?




I do believe the city was pressured by the utility companies to try to evict her. I think they are worried that many will be inspired by her story and decide to live off the grid too and that would mean less customers and less profit.

Like I said earlier in this thread, this is what happens when organized crime runs the utility companies.





new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join